Rui Pinto has again placed FIFA President Gianni Infantino under intense scrutiny, reviving accusations tied to the long-running Manchester City case and accusing him of shielding the club from harsher punishment.

The Portuguese hacker, whose leaked material helped trigger the Premier League investigation into Manchester City, described Infantino as “a cancer on football.” In a social media post, Pinto argued that Infantino was already aware of the issues around the club in 2014, when he was UEFA General Secretary.

“Back in 2014, there was a man who was already aware of the irregularities involving Manchester City,” the activist wrote on social media . “That man now runs FIFA.

“The infamous Gianni Infantino, then UEFA General Secretary, abused his authority, shared confidential documents and, in short, outmaneuvered the Investigatory Chamber, doing everything in his power to ensure that both Manchester City and PSG would merely receive a fine, avoiding a deeper investigation that could have led to a Champions League ban. All of these details were also revealed through Football Leaks.

“Given his actions as UEFA General Secretary and, more recently, as FIFA President, I can only say, in my humble opinion, that Gianni Infantino has become a cancer on football and should have no place in the future of the game.”

The comments revisit UEFA’s 2014 examination of Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain, when both clubs avoided competition bans and were instead fined. Pinto and Der Spiegel later claimed that Infantino “circumvented” normal procedure and helped steer the matter toward that outcome.

Among the documents cited in the report was an email allegedly sent by Infantino to Khaldoon Al Mubarak in May 2014. It included the line: “Sorry for my ‘late-Friday-night email,’” along with the phrase, “You know you can trust me. … Let’s be positive!”

Der Spiegel also reported that UEFA’s Investigatory Chamber found City had accumulated a deficit of at least €188 million during a period when only €45 million could be lost. The same report said Infantino had held “secret talks, even supplying them with confidential materials” and made “compromises that he was unauthorized to propose.”

City’s dissatisfaction was also highlighted through a hacked email allegedly written by Simon Cliff, in which Al Mubarak was quoted as saying: “Khaldoon said he would rather spend 30 million on the 50 best lawyers in the world to sue them for the next 10 years.”

Infantino has not responded publicly while touring Asian soccer associations.

Manchester City have taken the next step in their legal fight with the Premier League after confirming they have appealed against the guilty ruling over breaches of the league’s financial rules.

An appeal had been anticipated, and City have now made that move official with a statement that strongly rejected the original decision.

“Manchester City Football Club can confirm that at 7 p.m. on Thursday Oct.1, 2026 the Club lodged its comprehensive Appeal against the opinion of the Premier League Commission, in relation to the Premier League disciplinary matter,” the statement read.

“The Club’s firm position is that, on multiple grounds, the opinion contains clear material errors, of law, principle and fact and is unsafe.

“The Club is innocent of the accusations made by the Premier League and a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence exists in support of all of its positions, relating to this case.

“We will continue to respect due process and are necessarily restricted in what we can say further until all proceedings are complete.”

At the centre of the dispute is the funding of several sponsorship agreements. The independent commission concluded that a number of those deals were primarily financed by the Abu Dhabi government, of which owner Sheikh Mansour is a member, rather than by the companies involved in the contracts.

According to Sky Sports News , City intend to argue that the money came directly from Abu Dhabi officials and had nothing to do with Sheikh Mansour. The club’s position is that sponsors sought financial support from the Abu Dhabi government to meet their obligations to City, not from Sheikh Mansour’s Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG).

The Premier League said that funding was from ADUG and therefore linked to Sheikh Mansour, whose investment in the club is limited by the league’s rules. The commission dismissed that explanation, ruling: “It was an explanation that the club had concocted well after the event in an attempt to conceal the realities of the Disguised Funding Scheme.”

The case may also draw further interest from the English Football Association, which said on Friday it is waiting for a final verdict before deciding whether to act.

Premier League rivals are said to be split over what punishment should follow the findings against Manchester City, with opinions ranging from a severe sporting sanction to a ruling that would still allow the club to remain in the division.

City could lose the three titles won during the period under scrutiny, from 2009 to 2018, although any punishment is expected to shape the present or future rather than rewrite the past. The matter now rests with an independent panel, while City prepare an appeal.

According to The Guardian, after discussions with executives from rival clubs, there is a strong push for a penalty heavy enough to keep City out of the top flight for the foreseeable future. A straight relegation is not available in the normal sense, as the English Football League is a separate body and would not be bound to accept anything beyond the three clubs traditionally sent down. Even so, a significant points deduction could leave City anchored near the bottom of the table.

Those quoted in the report do not want a sanction that feels temporary. Their concern is that a one-season absence would simply allow City to return and continue as before. One executive said: “Relegation to the Championship for one season would be insufficient,” one executive is quoted as saying. “The commission has to arrive at a punishment that is proportionate for years of sustained and deliberate cheating, as well as providing a strong deterrent to it happening again.”

The panel does have the power to remove City from the top flight altogether. Yet Sky Sports News reported that two senior executives from unnamed Premier League clubs would be “staggered” and “amazed” if enough clubs truly backed expulsion.

Commercial concerns are central to that reluctance. City remain one of the league’s biggest attractions, and their removal would create problems for scheduling and television rights. Fewer fixtures would mean reduced broadcast value, with possible refunds affecting money distributed across the division. “If Man City were expelled, that would have massive commercial consequences for everyone in the league, and ultimately it would cost the other clubs an awful lot of money,” one executive said.

The Independent Football Regulator, introduced in September 2025, is also watching closely. Its chair, David Kogan, said: “The independent commission’s decision raises serious issues,” Kogan said. “The IFR has powers to assess the suitability of owners, directors and executives and we will use these powers where appropriate, in the interests of protecting the sustainability, honesty and integrity of English football where there is clear evidence of wrongdoing by individuals.

“This includes taking account of findings made by the Leagues. However, as the proceedings remain ongoing between Manchester City and the Premier League we will await further developments.

“We hope it can be resolved quickly for the sake of fans. For now, we have no further comment.”